Deer regs 2015 gun season

[Badhorse]

How long do we need to wait for the dnr to come up with the new regs for next year? I have a feeling that my zone will be changing harvest rules next year. I would need some time to research a new zone over the summer.

[mntatonka]

How long do we need to wait for the dnr to come up with the new regs for next year? I have a feeling that my zone will be changing harvest rules next year. I would need some time to research a new zone over the summer.

most areas in the state will be 1 deer limit, whether lottery or hunter's choice. The Metro area (with Duluth possibly becoming a new metro area), and a couple areas in Zone 3 will probably be the only exceptions.

[smsmith]

New regs won't come out until August. Intensive and managed areas will be very few and far between statewide....at least they better be

[Jameson]

How long do we need to wait for the dnr to come up with the new regs for next year? I have a feeling that my zone will be changing harvest rules next year. I would need some time to research a new zone over the summer.

Just start researching other states at this point.

It sounds like 346 and 349 will be Intensive this year.

[mntatonka]

It sounds like 346 and 349 will be Intensive this year.

Just like they should have been last year.

[Jameson]

Any idea why 346 and 349 weren't Intensive last year?

Was it due to low buck kill numbers the previous year causing the DNR to believe there not to be too many deer? Or ???

[mntatonka]

Any idea why 346 and 349 weren't Intensive last year?

Was it due to low buck kill numbers the previous year causing the DNR to believe there not to be too many deer? Or ???

My best guess is that they thought they could use an early antlerless season in parts of the permit areas to bring the population down, but that obviously didn't work, in part I assume because they were too restrictive on the boundaries do those sub permit areas.

[SmellEsox]

My guess is that it is because there was a significant decline in buck harvest in both zones, 5% in 346 and 11% in 349 which would be an indicator of a decline in population. Whether that means it is below goal or not I don't know. I would suggest calling DNR for the explanation rather than trying to get info from us computer forum jockeys.

[rockman]

Yep, looks like all the whiners and thumb suckers, who want/have to have a dozen deer right in the front of the door of their hunting cabin, trailer, farmhouse, etc. on opener morning, will get their way this fall via the DNR. Again, DNR really means do nothing right. Just another reason to leave this state after retirement. All this based on a hunter survey. What a bunch of horse manure. Retirement can't get here quick enough to leave this state full of crybabies, and losers.

[laker1]

Usually august 1

[tfran123]

Rockman, I can tell you as a land owner in Northern MN that deer numbers are way down. Too many years on intensive harvest (5 deer limit) coupled with two hard winters have numbers waaaayyyy down. Now if you think all we have is a bunch of complainers then go enjoy your golden years in FL and let us know how that goes for you. I'd call you uninformed, period.

[Jameson]

...I would suggest calling DNR for the explanation rather than trying to get info from us computer forum jockeys.

Problem is, neither can be believed 100% these days. Guess I would rather listen to an answer from someone that doesn't know it all, but isn't lying vs someone that knows a bunch, but I believe will not tell the whole truth.

[bowhunternw]

What exactly would change that would make you look for a different zone? It seems that you are always gauranteed a tag and based on deer numbers possibly a bonus tag. I do have a feeling that there will be very few areas with bonus tags this year.

[going4it]

Yep, looks like all the whiners and thumb suckers, who want/have to have a dozen deer right in the front of the door of their hunting cabin, trailer, farmhouse, etc. on opener morning, will get their way this fall via the DNR. Again, DNR really means do nothing right. Just another reason to leave this state after retirement. All this based on a hunter survey. What a bunch of horse manure. Retirement can't get here quick enough to leave this state full of crybabies, and losers.

This isn't whining??

[smsmith]

God forbid the deer herd is allowed to recover to sustainable levels

[Jameson]

God forbid the deer herd is allowed to recover to sustainable levels

He/She just might. We are considered near the edge of the whitetail's range.

[smsmith]

He/She just might. We are considered near the edge of the whitetail's range.

Really? Whitetails do just fine well into Alberta, Ontario, Manitoba and Saskatchewan.

I feel that an awful lot of MN deer hunters have come to accept what the MN DNR has been dishing out as "fact". What is so different from southern to central MN than WI, SD, or ND? Fact is, MN can easily support a significantly larger deer herd than what we currently have.

[fivebucks]

Yes Wisconsin has more deer than central MN but look at their habitat of rolling hills with woodlands and pasture land. If you look at the number of licenses ND and SD are issuing their deer populations are below that of MN. MN could support more deer IF we had more habitat in the farm areas. There are multiple deer drives in just about every wood lot in farm country that the deer cannot survive - they have no place to hide. We have what we have in central and southern MN farm country due to habitat and nothing the DNR would do would change that. You can't shoot a deer that the land cannot support. Funny that this exact same story can be played out with the pheasant - it is all about habitat.

[SmellEsox]

Not sure what central MN you are talking about, but mine is a perfect mix of ag and forest. We are talking whitetail nirvana here and we manage for less than 10 dpsm. You draw a line from basically SE MN and from the metro to Cambridge, Little Falls, Alexandria to Fergus Falls/Detroit Lakes and it is ideal habitat. It can easily support 3 times that many deer. Yes, SW MN is intensely agriculture and has a lower carrying capacity. But you yourself say that low deer numbers is due to "drives in every woodlot". If DNR would limit harvest more, there could be more deer there too. DNR controls deer numbers through their permit system. The hunter is just the combine that is the killing machine.

[monstermoose78]

Something to think about if we had 3 times as many deer. How many people would be hurt or die from hitting a deer in their cars? I drive from Princeton to St. Cloud most days and I would hate to see 3 times more deer. Also just because we have more deer does not mean we will bigger deer. I hunt in the arrowhead and we see about a deer a day. However the deer we see are of quality and I would take quality over numbers any day.

[mntatonka]

Yes Wisconsin has more deer than central MN but look at their habitat of rolling hills with woodlands and pasture land. If you look at the number of licenses ND and SD are issuing their deer populations are below that of MN. MN could support more deer IF we had more habitat in the farm areas. There are multiple deer drives in just about every wood lot in farm country that the deer cannot survive - they have no place to hide. We have what we have in central and southern MN farm country due to habitat and nothing the DNR would do would change that. You can't shoot a deer that the land cannot support. Funny that this exact same story can be played out with the pheasant - it is all about habitat.

there aren't many hunting parties left that do drives, since it's viewed by so many people as "bad". And believe me, deer can and do survive drives.

[hockeybc69]

Quote:

there aren't many hunting parties left that do drives, since it's viewed by so many people as "bad".

I sure wouldn't agree with that statement.

[SmellEsox]

Something to think about if we had 3 times as many deer. How many people would be hurt or die from hitting a deer in their cars? I drive from Princeton to St. Cloud most days and I would hate to see 3 times more deer. Also just because we have more deer does not mean we will bigger deer. I hunt in the arrowhead and we see about a deer a day. However the deer we see are of quality and I would take quality over numbers any day.

Not saying they should manage for three times what they do now. Just saying the habitat could support that many.

[BLACKJACK]

How many people would be hurt or die from hitting a deer in their cars?

People are their own worst enemies, they don't slow down, even at prime deer times, morning and evenings. My neighbor 'brags' that he's hit 8 deer, I've hit 1. Slow down and watch the ditches!!

[Jameson]

Really? Whitetails do just fine well into Alberta, Ontario, Manitoba and Saskatchewan....

At what kind of dpsm's? Are there population 'spotty' with pockets of deer here and there? Are they sustainable populations that allow everyone a buck tag, and every archer a doe tag?

Having a population, and having a population that can withstand our hunter pressure are not asking the same question. The populations of Alberta, Ontario, Manitoba, and Saskatchewan could not withstand our hunting pressure and maintain a 'huntable' population. Just like much of MN.